Jump to content

More Animal-Chests? (A solution to the 1 chester problem in DST)


Recommended Posts

So, we all know there is only one Chester in the game.

So what will happen in DST? Only one Chester for more players?

I suggest adding some retextured Chesters that work like Chester, only with a different texture, like, for example, an eyeball with leafy paws, or a clockwork walking chest, and every "Chester" will have a different Eyebone.

And maybe there will be a small percentage of having a retextured Chester instead of the normal one in Single player.

Yeah. Maybe one could be named "James", it's red and is similar to chester, but is like a tiny chest with legs. It'd be obtainable in singleplayer as well and has nothing unique about him besides it's design

Well, there actually are a red and blue eye'd eyebones in the inventoryitems.tex (capture the flag?). But I agree with Battal, chester is a luxury in some manner, should be limited.

 

The red eyebone is default, the dark one is nightmare chester and the blue one fridge chester.

While I agree with Battal in that Chester should be a luxury, I also think that there should be several, very hard to find eyebones. The first guy to find one has Chester follow him, and any other eyebones give anyone who owns one a special inventory in Chester.

E.G. Eric finds the first eyebone, so Chester follows him. Fred then finds one, so when he uses Chester, he accesses his own inventory, not Eric's. Gerald cannot use Chester, as he doesn't have an eyebone.

Just my two cents.

While I agree with Battal in that Chester should be a luxury, I also think that there should be several, very hard to find eyebones. The first guy to find one has Chester follow him, and any other eyebones give anyone who owns one a special inventory in Chester.

E.G. Eric finds the first eyebone, so Chester follows him. Fred then finds one, so when he uses Chester, he accesses his own inventory, not Eric's. Gerald cannot use Chester, as he doesn't have an eyebone.

Just my two cents.

I would prefer this way too. Here is my take on the whole multiple Chester suggestion: http://forums.kleientertainment.com/topic/36103-how-to-rebalance-dont-starve-for-multiplayer-console-commands-yesno-page-16/?p=499257

Here's another thing; the more Chesters there are, the more likely the player is to find them.  So by adding more, you're actually making them less valuable.  Deflation and the stock market and schiz.

"Today on Fox News: Overfload of chesters lowers chester's price on the international market and causes World War 3!"

Maybe there should be just one chester. There's an idea. Whao! That's already how it works!

 

Maybe 1 chester-like creature for every 3 players online. (1 chester for 1, 2, 3 players) (2 for 4, 5, 6)

The game should force you to pick who gets to use Chester. If someone is being an ass, lure some monsters to them and have them killed and take the eyebone. c:

 

Maybe there should be just one chester. There's an idea. Whao! That's already how it works!

Maybe 1 chester-like creature for every 3 players online. (1 chester for 1, 2, 3 players) (2 for 4, 5, 6)

The game should force you to pick who gets to use Chester. If someone is being an ass, lure some monsters to them and have them killed and take the eyebone. c:

My idea was (number of players)-1 [for a minimum of 1]= number of Chesters.

But something like each 2 players=1 Chester sounds better.

Still, I am curious about what the devs will do about Chester. The reason why I made this thread in the first place was to lure one of them in here to tell us about how our storage friend will work in DST...didnt work though :p

"Today on Fox News: Overfload of chesters lowers chester's price on the international market and causes World War 3!"

And that is how Chester Overlords came to rule the world....

(Stupid Fox News misspelling Overflow and Overload together thinking they can do portmanteaus :razz:)

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Please be aware that the content of this thread may be outdated and no longer applicable.

×
  • Create New...